Friday, April 11, 2008

Mahathirism the Blog

"Tun Dr M must not apologize". A commenter sent me a half-liner to alert me of this new blog called Mahathirism, set up by people who claim to be the former PM's supporters.The first posting is has to do with Tun Saleh Abas. I am meeting the former Lord President this morning to resume work on his upcoming auto/biography.

One would apologise if one feels remose; therefore do you think that Mahatir feels any regret at all for whatever most Malaysians feel and all lawyers believe he has done wrong to Tun Salleh ? I doubt it very much, but then, if we are to believe and expect Mahatir to feel remorse then we will have to also believe that he has at least an acceptable measure of ETHICS which from his past performances show he has none whatsoever.

From my perspective the problem that arises from this dispute is a Malaysian societal one; Malaysia is LAWLESS AND WE DO NOT HAVE A CORE OF ETHICS. Malaysia is Lawless and immoral. What motivates us as Malaysians is whatever we can enrich ourselves and get away with.

Let me tell you why I say it as it is; the fact that the Attorney General has put an end to the investigation of the police report made against Mahatir, shows what Malaysian society is all about; get political influence and you can do whatever you want and get away free from impunity. This is what I myself expirenced at the hand of Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali. THE LAW DOES NOT APPLY TO THOSE WHO CAN BUY PROTECTION.

In Malaysia you can forget about protection of the Law; it does not exist.

Hi Rocky, i read earlier about Seremban Umno division chief Ishak Ismail calling for a press conference on 'sabotage' in Seremban this morning. Should not miss his event Friday 10am @ Restoran Raudah, Jalan Rahang, Seremban. This guy is known among Umno people as a true Malay fighter and even the opposition has high regards for him. Don't expect MSM to cover his pc but bloggers would love him with his interesting quotes! Cheers Umno

Notwithstanding the motive behind Zaid Ibrahim's asking the Malaysian Government to apologise to Tun Saleh Abas, the Malaysian Government and especially Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad must apologise to Tun Saleh Abas. In fact not only must they apologise but also restore Tun Saleh Abas to a position of equal standing of a Lord President or Chief Justice as it is referred to now.

The reason is very simple. The Government is still the very same BN Government that Dr Mahathir was riding on before. Thus the same Government is still owing Saleh Abas its apology. And of Dr Mahathir for retiring in comfort after assasinating the character and the career of Tun Saleh Abas. It was not a perception that Dr Mahathir had murdered the judiciary; it was real. Of course Dr Mahathir continues to deny it. But we were not born yesterday or just having a primary school mentality or common sense. Another person who should apologise is no other than the unrecognised Lord President, Tan Sri Hamid Omar (He doesnt deserve the 'Tun' that goes with the post of Lord President that's why I mention only Tan Sri.

The Judiciary is now rotten to the root is the work of none other than Dr Mahathir and Hamid Omar. And Saleh Abas 'died' in the course of fighting against great injustice.

Denying it will make them less dignified. The truth always prevails and we know the truth of Tun Saleh Abas's dismissal on 8th of August 1988. Look at Chua Soi Lek admitting the truth and the matter rests there. People have respect for him and even elected his son to the Parliament.

Time is coming for these people to repent and speak the truth because their days are numbered.

I do understand how difficult it was for Dr Mahathir to rule at that time with his own generals were against him, but he has no reason to mutilate the judiciary, which will certainly be written in the annal of history.

When mistakes doneA leader must be willing to apologizeBeing stubborn holding his groundThinking on the highHe expects other to bow downThe king of the people………………..?

Why it is hard to apologize?No one should be high and mightyFeeling the pulse of the peopleOne has to remember it is only a short whileLive the life of graciousnessThough one may think he has done no wrong

We are here for a whileAverage around 78 yearsWhy make life miserable?Go and make peaceIt is the hall mark of a true leader

It doesn’t degrade one standingIn fact it brings cheer to manyA leader must be willing to acceptThe wrong moves of past decisionsThough it may look correct thenEvents followed the decisions then flawedA leader should then revaluate his standIf needs be, he has to say “I am sorry”Yet many find it hard to say

We want to move onYet past mistakes holding us backThe political leaders aren’t good at PRHow do the nation progress?

Modern world with village mentalityIt is time to wake up and glowLet the light shines aroundCorrect the past mistakes and move onLet us move in one cohesive nationWithout black spots in our minds

In the second trial of Anwar Ibrahim, Mahathir was served with a subpoena by the defence. He applied and had the subpoena set aside on April 21, 2000. The trial continued until August 2000.

Shafee gave his testimony on June 12, 2000. Cross examination by public prosecutor did not cast any doubt on the truthfulness of Shafee’s testimony. Mahathir knew or ought to have known of that testimony. It was serious in nature. The proceedings were reported in the media the following day.

Surely the public prosecutor, who was Abdul Gani Patail, could have advised Mahathir to appear in court and refute the testimony under oath if Mahathir thought they were untrue.

Being of the serious nature of the testimony against him, Mahathir could have volunteered to appear to clear his reputation but he never did. The irresistible inference is that he was afraid of giving sworn testimony in a court of law.

There clearly is no justification for him to now complain that he “should at least be heard”. He had every opportunity.

It is learnt from media reports yesterday that investigations against Mahathir were carried out following Shafee’s sworn testimony and the papers submitted to the Attorney General on Feb 15, 2000.

This sounds incredible. Shafee’s testimony was recorded by the court only on June 12, 2000. What investigation papers were submitted to the Attorney General in February 2000?

In any event as Shafee’s testimony was sworn and in the public domain was a sworn statement then taken from Mahathir and if so can that be made public?

The Inspector General of Police is also reported to have said that the then AG Mohtar Abdullah, decided that there was no case.

Going by how that same AG in November 2000 cleared the then Chief Justice Eusoff Chin, of any wrong doing over the CJ’s holiday trip to New Zealand with VK Lingam, the integrity of some of Mohtar’s decisions during the Mahathir era will remain questionable.

It is also learnt from media reports yesterday that ACA’s investigation into the EPU Director General took three years from 1998 completed and submitted to the AG’s Chambers in 2001 and the file was closed for “lack of evidence”. This is puzzling.

The then EPU Director General was appointed to the high office of the governor of Bank Negara in September 1998 and he served in that office until April 2000.

Does this mean that Malaysia had a governor of the central bank who had an investigation for corruption pending against him throughout his tenure? What happened to the policy Malaysians were always told that those who are appointed to high office are always cleared by the special branch and other agencies before appointment?

There is something very unsettling about the statements of these three high officials of our enforcement agencies as reported in the media yesterday.

His remarks that I made libellous statements about a fellow Malaysian and sought immunity as the statements had nothing to do with matters related to my UN work are just outrageous.

It is well documented now since the advisory opinion of the World Court in 1999 that the statements I made and quoted in the Commercial International Litigation journal were within the parameters of my UN mandate on the independence of judges and lawyers.

It was a universal mandate from the UN Commission on Human Rights. The immunity from legal process sought was not personal to me but that of the UN.

The UN sought the immunity under the Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations which Malaysia ratified without any reservation.

The reference to the World Court was made by a resolution of the UN Economic and Social Council. The opinion of the World Court was binding on Malaysia pursuant to the Convention.

Four suits were filed against me in 1995 by corporations and two individuals claiming a total sum of RM280 million in damages for defamation.

The two individuals are well known to Mahathir, hence his further anger when Malaysia lost in the World Court.

The statements I made about the state of the Malaysian judiciary after the infamous Ayer Molek case and reported in the journal in 1995 are borne out and justified in the light of recent developments and proceedings of the Royal Commission on the Lingam video clip. Lingam was one of the individuals who sued me.

No court, however, found my statements libellous.

The fear over the want of independence, impartiality and integrity of the Malaysian judiciary during the Eusoff Chin era is best illustrated by developments in four other suits filed by the same parties for defamation against a large Kuala Lumpur law firm and two of its partners.

It was over remarks made by the two partners and published in the same article in the International Commercial Litigation. The total amount claimed was RM280 million.

The defences of the law firm and partners were handled by the professional indemnity insurers whose headquarters were in London. Realising that the defence was constantly losing on interlocutory proceedings in the suits, they no longer had any faith in obtaining justice before our courts. Rather than being saddled with a colossal award in the region of RM280 million after trial they decided and agreed to settle the four suits for a total of RM17.7 million.

Having recorded the terms before the courts here and paid the agreed sum the insurers filed proceedings in London before the High Court of England & Wales in 1999 against the publishers to recover the RM17.7 million or part thereof by way of indemnity and/or contribution.

In their defence the publishers pleaded, amongst others, “that the claimants insurers only decided to capitulate and pay the original plaintiffs exorbitant sums by way of ostensible damages and costs because they apprehended that the claimants would not have received a fair trial at the hands of the Malaysia’s internationally discredited judiciary and legal system”.

By June 2000 Mahathir’s attention was drawn to the conduct of Eusoff Chin and his breach of the Judges’ Code of Ethics justifying the setting up of a tribunal under article 125 of the Constitution.

He was shown those infamous New Zealand holiday photographs. Yet he refused to take any action whereas in 1988 he went out of his way to find flimsy evidence to act against Salleh Abbas. His motives were highly questionable.

In the light of all what I have set out (and there are many other instances) there is justification for Mahathir to be investigated for abuse of power during his tenure as Prime Minister.

As he himself has welcomed such an investigation I urge the government to seriously consider and set up a Royal Commission of Inquiry to look into just not abuse of power during his tenure as prime minister but also how he consolidated that power during his tenure.

About time someone speaks up for Dr. M. For all the wrongs that he did, he brought modernisation and civil society to Malaysia. Where would we all be if not for his single-minded determination to see Malaysia and her citizens become what they are today. He is a visionary leader unsurpassed by many. Malaysia is or was regarded as a tiger economy, her citizens held their head up high with pride.His contemporary, Lee Kuan Yew, also exhibited and practised the same dictatorial-type leadership in order to bring up Singapore to where she is. We can only blame ourselves for being the more corrupt, the less responsible, resulting in the less than sterling performance now.I am fed up with the attitudes of all these supposedly well heeled, overseas educated (some), ingrates of Malaysia. How easily are you led by your noses that you cannot see the wood for its trees....

I read your address to the conference of judges at the Marriot Hotel, Putra Jaya, and I have to say that if your wish for an independent judiciary is progressed along the path that you had enunciated in your speech, then Malaysia will indeed REGAIN the respect & trust in the Malaysian Judiciary that was the admiration of all of South East Asia.

The present state of the Malaysian Judiciary is the laughing stock of the world and if I might add, the state of the Malaysian Judiciary today can only be rivalled by the standard of Administration of the LAW & JUSTICE THAT EXIST IN INDONESIA. Forgive me for saying so, but there is a state of utter lawlessness prevailing in Malaysia. Judge Dato Zainon binti Mohd. Ali, who now sits on the bench of the Malaysian Court of Appeal, and who as the judge of 1st instance UNLAWFULLY AND ILLEGALLY STRUCK OFF MY WIFE’S ABOVE PETITION, the details of her criminal behaviour is fully documented in my blogg. At http://yapchongyee.blogspot.com. The details are too lengthy to discuss here; however, I can state that I graduated from the University of Singapore in Law in 1967 and I practised at the Malaysian bar from 1967 until I migrated to Australia in 1978.

Either through ignorance of the law relevant to issues raised in my wife’s petition, Judge Dato Zainon binti Mohd. Ali or that she intentionally DISREGARDED the provisions of the law relevant to my wife’s case or even more heinously she acted CORRUPTLY, Judge zainon binti Mohd. Ali committed several criminal offences while adjudicating my wife’s case on the bench. This ridiculous turn of events must be unprecedented in all of history of the British Commonwealth (since we all share the same legal history).

I have written to the Chief Justice of Malaysia and I enclose a copy to this letter. I had written to the Chief Justice several times but I have never ever received ny replies. This is an official compliant so I do not see under what circumstances can the Chief Justice or the Attorney General can refuse to reply.

If Yang Mulia, is serious about what you said at the conference of Judges, then allow me to reiterate that even a JUDGE OF THE HIGHEST COURT OF MALAYSIA MUST BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR COMMITTING CRIMES. Judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali committed several criminal offences and must be held accountable for them.

As a demonstration of my good faith, IF UPON INVESTIGATION OF THE FACTS THAT I CHARGED JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI WITH HAVING COMMITTED IS FOUND TO BE TRUE THEN IS IT NOT THE DUTY OF THE A.-G TO PROSECUTE JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI ? In this event I will be available to defend myself in court. TO PROVE THAT MALYSIA WANTS AN INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY THAT IS ETHICAL, HONEST AND ADMINISTER THE LAW IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAW, The Malaysian Attorney General can do the following, upon police investigation of the facts that I have charged her with :

(1) IF POLICE INVESTIGATION INTO MY CHARGES AGAINST JUDGE ZAINON ARE VALID AND THERE IS/ARE REASONABLE CAUSE TO CHARGE JUDGE ZAINON BINTI MOHD. ALI WITH COMMITTING CRIMINAL OFFENCES, THEN I WILL COME TO KL TO BEAR WITNESS, OR

(2)If upon police investigation there is no basis for charging judge Zainon binti Mohd. Ali with criminal offences then obviously I have both libelled or more seriously for committing the more serious crime of SEDITION in with case the Malaysian Attorney General is under a duty to apply for my extradition to be charged in a Malaysian Court.

If Yang Mulia is serious about bringing change to the Malaysian Judiciary then this case is the most open demonstration of that resolve.

This strawberry guy, much appreciated for what you did, but did any of your work have certain impact on my everyday life, NO NO NO. And your comment sounds like as malay says "angkat bakul sendiri".

Mr Yap, with all due respect,to say that this country is LAWLESS, certainly OXFORD dictionary is needed hear. But I do agree there are people who use and abuse the law, not only politicians but also lawyers like punjabi tua Karpal.

Let us be hypothetical, get Karpal or Kit Siang as PM, and see how long they last to rule a nation with multiracial.

Anon at 9.41, looking at Tun's well being from recent gatherings he attended, my opinion is that he sleeps much much much better at night compared to Dollah.

Thank you for your comment. In a blog, we make comments based on our viewpoints on an issue being discussed. The objective (matlamat) of this is that we obtain many different viewpoints, and get to consider different facets of an issue. Mungkin pendapat saudara berbeza dari pendapat saya. Tapi mungkin pendapat kita masing-masing mempunyai kebenarannya yang secara keseluruhan boleh memperkayakan pemahaman kita. Therefore, we hope that from this exchange we gain a fuller, more balanced understanding of an issue, and, ideally, an understanding that brings us closer to the truth.

I say bro this Mahathir guy is living in a fantacy. He has committed so many crimes against the citizens of our country. He knew very well that our great father of Independence YM Tuanku Abdul Rahman in his wisdom has ensured that our constitution has four safegaurds i.e. The Sultans, The Executive, the judiciary and lastly the rakyat. He went out to dismantle each of the safegaurds, the sultans, judiciary and the rakyat making the executive so powerful so that he can have his way and piratise GLCs' to hand over the wealth of the country to his children & cronies. And he has the gall to condem our Pak Lah...I hope Pak Lah will get the RCI to korek, korek, korek to the extend of Mahathir's involvement and send him to Sg Buloh.